Victims' Families Want To Air New 9/11 Truth Ad

[Meister]

I never really thought much about 9/11 until recently, and then I started investigating it on my own. What drew me into looking into it myself was the talk about tower #7. I hadn't even heard about tower #7 until about a year ago. And, I'm sorry folks, a 47 story building doesn't fall in less than seven seconds into it's own footprint from spontaneous fires. That's not even a remote possibility.

Blah blah blah. Which sock puppet is this one? The same old story every truthtard tells. I believed until blah blah blah! Then they spout a bunch of lies that expose them for the ignorant retards they are. The building 7 collapse was over ten seconds. The fires were not spontanious. The building didn't fall into it's own footprint as proven by the buildings damaged around it.

Truthtards can't even come up with plausible bullshit anymore.

Actually I'm a new member. Thanks for the warm welcome. All the original videos of tower #7 show a collapse in under 7 seconds. I didn't tell any lies. You can look at any video of the collapse and it shows it happening in less than 7 seconds.

BTW, it took NIST over 7 years to complete their investigation of tower #7. It seems to me that if there weren't any asses to cover and a simple explanation could have been provided, it would have happened in less than 7 years.

And yes, it did fall into it's own footrprint. NIST obviously had to go to great lengths to whitewash this investigation.

Your assertion that fires can bring down a skycraper in 7 or 10 seconds is laughable just as the NIST report is, which had to be altered six times before finally being completed.

Reality just doesn't back up the government's bullshit story. And you are obviously a moron if you believe otherwise.

84% of Americans don't believe the 9/11 commission's report. Time to wake up.

Just because YOUR number of 84% don't believe the commission's report doesn't mean that 84% thinks it's a conspiracy. That would be moronic if you thought that.

I also have question your number of 84%.

 

[youngpatriot]

[/QUOTE]

Just because YOUR number of 84% don't believe the commission's report doesn't mean that 84% thinks it's a conspiracy. That would be moronic if you thought that.

I also have question your number of 84%.[/QUOTE]

CNN shows 65% believe it was an inside job. CBS shows 84% don't believe the NIST story. There's a difference between doubting the story and believing it was an inside job. But those are pretty damning statistics for the government. America is waking up.

 

[youngpatriot]

Here are a few good tips for finding the truth about anything:

1. Evaluate all of the physical and circumstantial evidence
2. Judge the credibility of the source
3. Follow the money trail

1. The physical evidence of 9/11 hardly supports the story they are selling. On so many levels. I hardly know where to begin.
2. The credibility of the U.S. government is completely shot. The CIA and black ops that have now been declassified and are public record now show that the government is more than willing to attack it's own citizens to further an agenda. They've been caught lying so many times, I don't believe a damn thing they tell me anymore.
3. Oil, arms, drugs and of course Larry Silverstein collecting on a 7 billion dollar insurance payout on the buildings that he purchased 6 months prior to the attacks on 9/11

 

[Fizz]

WHAT! ROTFLMAO.

The entire building fell symmetrically with no resistance, how can you try to spin this?

try not to look like a complete moron....

let's see your proof it fell with no resistance....


(i won't hold my breathe)

 

[Fizz]

I never really thought much about 9/11 until recently, and then I started investigating it on my own. What drew me into looking into it myself was the talk about tower #7. I hadn't even heard about tower #7 until about a year ago. And, I'm sorry folks, a 47 story building doesn't fall in less than seven seconds into it's own footprint from spontaneous fires. That's not even a remote possibility.

and the only people making the claim that it fell in less than 7 seconds into its own footprint is YOU STUPID ******* TWOOFERS.

so where is your proof it fell in LESS THAN 7 SECONDS?!! where is your proof it fell IN ITS OWN FOOTPRINT?!!

 

[youngpatriot]

I never really thought much about 9/11 until recently, and then I started investigating it on my own. What drew me into looking into it myself was the talk about tower #7. I hadn't even heard about tower #7 until about a year ago. And, I'm sorry folks, a 47 story building doesn't fall in less than seven seconds into it's own footprint from spontaneous fires. That's not even a remote possibility.

and the only people making the claim that it fell in less than 7 seconds into its own footprint is YOU STUPID ******* TWOOFERS.

so where is your proof it fell in LESS THAN 7 SECONDS?!! where is your proof it fell IN ITS OWN FOOTPRINT?!!

Oh I know..........NIST said it fell in 10.3 seconds.............and why would we ever doubt the institute that changed it's story 6 times and took over 7 years to reach that conclusion?........we MUST be crazy................

 

[candycorn]

I never really thought much about 9/11 until recently, and then I started investigating it on my own. What drew me into looking into it myself was the talk about tower #7. I hadn't even heard about tower #7 until about a year ago. And, I'm sorry folks, a 47 story building doesn't fall in less than seven seconds into it's own footprint from spontaneous fires. That's not even a remote possibility.

Blah blah blah. Which sock puppet is this one? The same old story every truthtard tells. I believed until blah blah blah! Then they spout a bunch of lies that expose them for the ignorant retards they are. The building 7 collapse was over ten seconds. The fires were not spontanious. The building didn't fall into it's own footprint as proven by the buildings damaged around it.

Truthtards can't even come up with plausible bullshit anymore.

Actually I'm a new member. Thanks for the warm welcome. All the original videos of tower #7 show a collapse in under 7 seconds. I didn't tell any lies. You can look at any video of the collapse and it shows it happening in less than 7 seconds.

BTW, it took NIST over 7 years to complete their investigation of tower #7. It seems to me that if there weren't any asses to cover and a simple explanation could have been provided, it would have happened in less than 7 years.

And yes, it did fall into it's own footrprint. NIST obviously had to go to great lengths to whitewash this investigation.

Your assertion that fires can bring down a skycraper in 7 or 10 seconds is laughable just as the NIST report is, which had to be altered six times before finally being completed.

Reality just doesn't back up the government's bullshit story. And you are obviously a moron if you believe otherwise.

84% of Americans don't believe the 9/11 commission's report. Time to wake up.

Oh brother....and you just automatically knew how to put up a picture immediately. Nice try sock boy.

Let us know when you start blaming the Jews, Turner Construction, giving up rooks on a chessboard or whatever it was you were talking about basspro.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

So, are you going to address the material or continue to make yourself look like an ass wipe?

Ad hominem doesn't count. The material is up for question, not me.

Address it.

Thanks for proving your irrelevance yet again, TakeAShit. Here's a hint. When you're irrelevant, nobody gives a flying **** what you think or what you demand. So take your demands and shove them up your ass where your brain is. Pretend Cobain is your role model and follow his example.

You prove nothing as usual. You can't address the facts I present because they contradict your lie. You instead, must resort to using ad hominem as your argument in order to hide from the fact you can not explain the items I have presented.

You're boring and really bad at this, dude. You should find a hobby or something...maybe discuss a topic where you can actually properly debate the information instead of attacking people. But again, that would expose you as the liar that you are.....

Truly pathetic, the lot of you trolls....

 

[Patriot911]

I never really thought much about 9/11 until recently, and then I started investigating it on my own. What drew me into looking into it myself was the talk about tower #7. I hadn't even heard about tower #7 until about a year ago. And, I'm sorry folks, a 47 story building doesn't fall in less than seven seconds into it's own footprint from spontaneous fires. That's not even a remote possibility.

Blah blah blah. Which sock puppet is this one? The same old story every truthtard tells. I believed until blah blah blah! Then they spout a bunch of lies that expose them for the ignorant retards they are. The building 7 collapse was over ten seconds. The fires were not spontanious. The building didn't fall into it's own footprint as proven by the buildings damaged around it.

Truthtards can't even come up with plausible bullshit anymore.

Actually I'm a new member. Thanks for the warm welcome.

Uh huh.

All the original videos of tower #7 show a collapse in under 7 seconds.

Wrong again. Or are you going to ignore the collapse of the penthouse and pretend that didn't matter like all your other accounts do?

I didn't tell any lies.

Sure you have. I outlined them above.

You can look at any video of the collapse and it shows it happening in less than 7 seconds.

Yet you insist on ignoring the penthouse. Why is that? Can't you even be honest with yourself or are you just hoping nobody will notice?

BTW, it took NIST over 7 years to complete their investigation of tower #7.

Yet another lie. It took over seven years for them to come out with the report, but that was because they did their report on the towers first. It is no wonder truthtards have to make sock puppets. Their credibility is shot so bad they have to make a puppet just to regurgitate the same bullshit.

It seems to me that if there weren't any asses to cover and a simple explanation could have been provided, it would have happened in less than 7 years.

Many layers of bullshit. So the entire NIST along with the thousands of consultants that were used are all in on the conspiracy? WOW! Actually, if they were in on it, they would already have an explanation in hand, wouldn't they? Or are you going to try and pretend the NIST was caught off guard and were ordered to fake it despite the fact they would knowingly be covering up the murder of 3000 people and subject to spending the rest of their lives in prison.

And yes, it did fall into it's own footrprint. NIST obviously had to go to great lengths to whitewash this investigation.

So we can either believe a now known, proven liar who is pretending to be an expert based on who knows what bullshit over the pictures of the damage to other buildings. Hmmm. That is a hard one!

Your assertion that fires can bring down a skycraper in 7 or 10 seconds is laughable just as the NIST report is, which had to be altered six times before finally being completed.

As new evidence came to light, they altered their theory to fit all the known evidence. I would expect nothing less. It is only complete idiots like truthtards that come up with a theory and then defend it to the death no matter how stupid or flawed it turns out to be.

Reality just doesn't back up the government's bullshit story. And you are obviously a moron if you believe otherwise.

Uh huh. So I suppose you can actually produce something other than your retarded opinion to back this up, right? How about some actual evidence of controlled demolition? The video tapes conclusively show no explosions. No explosive residue was ever found. No explosive evidence like primers or wiring were ever found. No steel cut by explosives was ever found. No seismic evidence of explosives were recorded. Yet you want to call others morons because they don't think like a retard like you? Now THAT is funny!

84% of Americans don't believe the 9/11 commission's report. Time to wake up.

Wrong again, fucktard. When are you ******* liars going to quit misquoting polls? Oh wait. You're all a bunch of pathological liars with paranoid delusions. You can't help it, right?

 

[Patriot911]

So, are you going to address the material or continue to make yourself look like an ass wipe?

Ad hominem doesn't count. The material is up for question, not me.

Address it.

Thanks for proving your irrelevance yet again, TakeAShit. Here's a hint. When you're irrelevant, nobody gives a flying **** what you think or what you demand. So take your demands and shove them up your ass where your brain is. Pretend Cobain is your role model and follow his example.

You prove nothing as usual. You can't address the facts I present because they contradict your lie.

On the contrary, TakeAShit, your "formulas" were absolutely meaningless, especially since you refused to actually run the calculations. Not to mention the fact you had to plagerize it word for word from Judy Woods, a known crackpot!

You instead, must resort to using ad hominem as your argument in order to hide from the fact you can not explain the items I have presented.

You're boring and really bad at this, dude. You should find a hobby or something...maybe discuss a topic where you can actually properly debate the information instead of attacking people. But again, that would expose you as the liar that you are.....

More meaningless ad hominem from the little ***** who whines about ad hominem! Maybe TakeAShit should look up hypocrite!

Truly pathetic, the lot of you trolls....

Yes, you ******* truthtards are very, VERY pathetic. Especially ones like you that can't actually come up with anything on their own, so have to plagerize and pretend they know what it is they just posted.

 

[youngpatriot]

One thing that is always for certain when dealing with these truth debunkers, there is sure to be a lot of cheap trash talk and name calling to account for the lack of substance to their arguments. When people get defensive it is proof positive that you have hit a nerve.

Thermite was found by chemical engineer Mark Basile at WTC. Of course he wasn't allowed to testify in front of the 9/11 commission, just as NONE of the eye witnesses that had conflicting accounts of what happened with the government's story were allowed to testify. It really doesn't take a genius to doubt that fires were capable of bringing down a skyscraper in one fell swoop. It really really doesn't. Up until 9/11 no steel building had collapsed from fire. And since 9/11 no steel building has collapsed from fire. Skyscrapers aren't made out of toothpicks. They are made of reinforced concrete and steel. In order to account for the metal being melted into pools of molten lava, the steel would have had to have been heated up over 2800 degrees.

If the building hadn't fallen straight down just like a demolition, the collapse would've been more believable. For all resistance under the top of the building to be removed all at once and have the building fall straight down leaves no doubt in any layman's mind that it was a controlled demolition.

If you asked someone about an event and they changed their story 6 times, you would call bullshit. But not when it comes to these truth debunkers. They cling to NIST as the one and only credible source of info. Any other info coming out must be by an overzealous "Twoofer."

You 9/11 deniers are long on insults and smiley faces, but short on substance and information. It really is middle school physics here. Not that complicated. In order to believe NIST's report you have to be almost completely devoid of a functional brain. NIST was obviously told to phony up a fraudulent lie. 9/11 goes all the way to the top. Do you really think these guys are going to indict the president and all the other higher ups in their findings? Of course not. They enjoy being alive.

 

[SFC Ollie]

One thing that is always for certain when dealing with these truth debunkers, there is sure to be a lot of cheap trash talk and name calling to account for the lack of substance to their arguments. When people get defensive it is proof positive that you have hit a nerve.
Truth is that I normally make an attempt to be civil to new conspiracy posters.
Thermite was found by chemical engineer Mark Basile at WTC. Was it really? Kindly provide some proof of this find. Of course he wasn't allowed to testify in front of the 9/11 commission, just as NONE of the eye witnesses that had conflicting accounts of what happened with the government's story were allowed to testify.I believe there were 12 open or public hearings, God only knows how many eyewitness accounts were given in person to the commission or read by members of the commission It really doesn't take a genius to doubt that fires were capable of bringing down a skyscraper in one fell swoop. It really really doesn't. Up until 9/11 no steel building had collapsed from fire. And since 9/11 no steel building has collapsed from fire. First time for everything isn't there? Do you have any proof that it couldn't have been the fire? Skyscrapers aren't made out of toothpicks. They are made of reinforced concrete and steel. In order to account for the metal being melted into pools of molten lava, the steel would have had to have been heated up over 2800 degrees. Again kindly provide proof that there was any molten steel.

If the building hadn't fallen straight down just like a demolition, the collapse would've been more believable. For all resistance under the top of the building to be removed all at once and have the building fall straight down leaves no doubt in any layman's mind that it was a controlled demolition.Resistance was not removed all at once from building 7 ( at least I think that is what you are refering to)

If you asked someone about an event and they changed their story 6 times, you would call bullshit. But not when it comes to these truth debunkers. They cling to NIST as the one and only credible source of info. Any other info coming out must be by an overzealous "Twoofer." Fact is I for one disagree with parts of the NIST report, but I'm no expert.

You 9/11 deniers are long on insults and smiley faces, but short on substance and information. It really is middle school physics here. Not that complicated. In order to believe NIST's report you have to be almost completely devoid of a functional brain. NIST was obviously told to phony up a fraudulent lie. 9/11 goes all the way to the top. Do you really think these guys are going to indict the president and all the other higher ups in their findings? Of course not. They enjoy being alive.

Now look who's calling the kettle black.....

 

[Meister]

Meister:Just because YOUR number of 84% don't believe the commission's report doesn't mean that 84% thinks it's a conspiracy. That would be moronic if you thought that.

I also have question your number of 84%.[/QUOTE]

Youngpartiot:CNN shows 65% believe it was an inside job. CBS shows 84% don't believe the NIST story. There's a difference between doubting the story and believing it was an inside job. But those are pretty damning statistics for the government. America is waking up.[/QUOTE]

Meister:I tried to track down your polls, all I came up with is conspiracy forums that claim those polls are correct, without any links to actual polls....just like what your doing. I even went to CNN and CBS sites and couldn't bring it up. You need to vet what has been told to you as fact. Just sayin....

 

[Meister]

Thanks for proving your irrelevance yet again, TakeAShit. Here's a hint. When you're irrelevant, nobody gives a flying **** what you think or what you demand. So take your demands and shove them up your ass where your brain is. Pretend Cobain is your role model and follow his example.

You prove nothing as usual. You can't address the facts I present because they contradict your lie.

On the contrary, TakeAShit, your "formulas" were absolutely meaningless, especially since you refused to actually run the calculations. Not to mention the fact you had to plagerize it word for word from Judy Woods, a known crackpot!

You instead, must resort to using ad hominem as your argument in order to hide from the fact you can not explain the items I have presented.

You're boring and really bad at this, dude. You should find a hobby or something...maybe discuss a topic where you can actually properly debate the information instead of attacking people. But again, that would expose you as the liar that you are.....

More meaningless ad hominem from the little ***** who whines about ad hominem! Maybe TakeAShit should look up hypocrite!

Truly pathetic, the lot of you trolls....

Yes, you ******* truthtards are very, VERY pathetic. Especially ones like you that can't actually come up with anything on their own, so have to plagerize and pretend they know what it is they just posted.

What did he plagerize? Please provide proof....as I looked I couldn't find it.

 

[Patriot911]

One thing that is always for certain when dealing with these truth debunkers, there is sure to be a lot of cheap trash talk and name calling to account for the lack of substance to their arguments. When people get defensive it is proof positive that you have hit a nerve.

Wrong again, fucktard. Sure there is a lot of trash talk, but I've also shown you've lied time and time again and you've failed miserably at responding to your failures. So there is indeed substance to my posts, much to your dismay.

Thermite was found by chemical engineer Mark Basile at WTC.

Thermite is aluminum and rust. You can find that just about anywhere, jackass! Now, if you're talking about the Jones' report, they didn't even claim to have found thermite, but some unknown "thermitic material".

Of course he wasn't allowed to testify in front of the 9/11 commission, just as NONE of the eye witnesses that had conflicting accounts of what happened with the government's story were allowed to testify.

Wrong again, fucktard.

Why wasn't he allowed to testify? Because he supposedly found the "thermite" in 2010, years after the commission was closed.

It really doesn't take a genius to doubt that fires were capable of bringing down a skyscraper in one fell swoop.

This coming from a fucktard who has no credentials and ignores the true professionals that understand the dynamics involved.

Here's a hint, ya piece of shit sock puppet.... if fires can't take down skyscrapers, why do they bother with fire retardant on any and all exposed steel?

It really really doesn't.

But it does take a retard of epic proportions to believe fires can't cause a collapse and pretend they know more than the experts, doesn't it.

Up until 9/11 no steel building had collapsed from fire.

Wrong again, fucktard. You got your quotes messed up. See, the rest of your truthtard butt buddies know there have been plenty of steel buildings that collapsed from fire, so they use the term skyscraper to make the claim semi-correct. You really should talk to your superiors over in the truthtard bowel movement before making such a jackass out of yourself.

And since 9/11 no steel building has collapsed from fire.

Wrong yet again, fucktard. The Windsor tower in Madrid Spain. Fire collapsed the part of the structure that was steel framed, yet the concrete framed section survived. Another one of your blatant lies exposed and another lie you will run away from without acknowledging.

Skyscrapers aren't made out of toothpicks. They are made of reinforced concrete and steel.

Neither the towers nor WTC 7 were made with reinforced concrete for structural support, but used concrete in the flooring. Have you even bothered to look at the facts before making a jackass out of yourself, or are you just trying to remember what the other truthtards claimed while trying to look intelligent and failing?

In order to account for the metal being melted into pools of molten lava, the steel would have had to have been heated up over 2800 degrees.

So show us evidence of molten steel. Go ahead. A metalurgists examination results would be good. People seeing a molten substance and pretending it is steel doesn't cut it. No big solid chunks of steel that were formerly melted into pools were ever found. Not only that, but molten steel is not a byproduct of either high explosives used in controlled demolitions or in thermite.

If the building hadn't fallen straight down just like a demolition, the collapse would've been more believable.

Wrong again, fucktard. It might be more believable to an ignorant **** like you, but every structural engineer in the world would have been demanding an explanation. Just because you are ignorant about structural engineering doesn't mean the world has to behave as you THINK it should.

For all resistance under the top of the building to be removed all at once and have the building fall straight down leaves no doubt in any layman's mind that it was a controlled demolition.

Wrong again, fucktard. Only the truly ignorant such as yourself believes all the resistance has to be removed for a building to fall straight down. Thanks for proving your ignorance, but that is all you've proven. In order for a building to fall to the side, it has to be destroyed at the base and the center of the tower has to go outside the footprint of the building. The bigger the building, the more impossible this becomes before the structures that are normally just shaing the load keeping the building standing are suddenly demanded to carry the entire load of the building, and thus fail.

If you asked someone about an event and they changed their story 6 times, you would call bullshit.

Truthtards change their story all the time. First you stupid ***** claimed it was high explosives in WTC 7. When confronted with audio evidence truthtard claims were wrong, they changed it to thermite. When confronted with evidence THIS was wrong, truthtards pretended it was a whole bunch of very small charges, or that the buildings muffled the blasts. And, as has been explained to your sorry ignorant ass before, having an agency that alters the work in progress to continue to fit the facts as they become known is far more credible than one that has a theory and ignores everything else that comes up in the meantime.

But not when it comes to these truth debunkers. They cling to NIST as the one and only credible source of info.

Wrong again, fucktard. While the NIST is a credible source as proven by the fact you truthtards have yet to come up with anything even coming close to debunking it, it is far from the only source I use. But then again, you have to come up with SOMETHING to try and pretend you are somehow better, right? Guess what, you piece of shit liar.... nobody is buying it.

Any other info coming out must be by an overzealous "Twoofer."

If there is evidence to back up the claim, I'll look at it. You stupid ***** are always prancing around trying to pretend you have all kinds of evidence, but when asked to present it, you scatter like cockroaches when the lights are turned on.

You 9/11 deniers are long on insults and smiley faces, but short on substance and information.

No, that would be you stupid *****.

It really is middle school physics here.

Yet you can't even get that right, can you.

Not that complicated.

It really isn't complicated.... unless you're a truthtard who pretends to know physics and is really just a jackass.

In order to believe NIST's report you have to be almost completely devoid of a functional brain.

If that were the case, you would be sucking up to the NIST like you do Alex Jones. Instead, the only ones bashing the NIST are the truthtards. The other experts around the world who set code based on findings from the NIST didn't find anything major wrong with the NIST report. So who are we to believe? Truthtard pieces of shit like you who constantly lie? Or the NIST which has no reason to lie?

NIST was obviously told to phony up a fraudulent lie.

Yet other structural agencies have not backed up your bullshit. Why is that? Oh right. They're not braindead like you.

9/11 goes all the way to the top. Do you really think these guys are going to indict the president and all the other higher ups in their findings?

The NIST doesn't indict anyone, numbnuts! They simply report what happened to cause the collapse. You're so ******* ignorant you don't even know who does what!

Of course not. They enjoy being alive.

Uh huh. Have you noticed the President who was in power on 9/11 is no longer in power, and has no ability to "silence" anyone. And then, of course, there is the logical falacy of you ignorant *****. If you actually believed that anyone who speaks out about the government being behind 9/11 is at risk of losing their lives, we wouldn't hear peep one out of you pussies.

Thanks for the laughs, fucktard!

 

[JiggsCasey]

Dude, you don't come here to laugh... that is obvious, and you're not fooling anyone... you come here to pontificate and soothe your boiling wrath. You're such an easy instrument to play.

You may be the most insecure loser in the history of blogging forums. Every other word out of your mouth is a curse, and all of your posts amount to junior high screed.

You're such a mental midget, you spend countless hours over a holiday weekend arguing on the internet, and "countering" people you perpetually label as "dumb." Who does that? State your business and be done with it. But why return day after day after day repeating the same goofy pablum? We get it. Get out of the house and see if you can find a girl to kiss.

In short, get a life, "patriot"

 

[Patriot911]

What did he plagerize? Please provide proof....as I looked I couldn't find it.

It was a while ago. It started with TASB pretending he is a structural engineer, yet he had no clue where the energy in a collapse comes from which is always taught in first year physics at the most.

So I gave him an education here.

His response can be found here

This post was directly lifted from Judy Woods' site here, or here, or here, yet no reference back to Judy Woods or that he was quoting someone else, thus hoping someone might think the work was his. That, to me, is a classic case of plagerization.

Unfortunately for TASB, while the formula for Judy's bullshit are sound, you will notice neither she nor TASB ever attempt to put values in the formula, but instead rely on people being impressed by the formula themselves even when they are meaningless without values.

 

[Patriot911]

Dude, you don't come here to laugh... that is obvious, and you're not fooling anyone... you come here to pontificate and soothe your boiling wrath. You're such an easy instrument to play.

You may be the most insecure loser in the history of blogging forums. Every other word out of your mouth is a curse, and all of your posts amount to junior high screed.

You're such a mental midget, you spend countless hours over a holiday weekend arguing on the internet, and "countering" people you perpetually label as "dumb." Who does that? State your business and be done with it. But why return day after day after day repeating the same goofy pablum? We get it. Get out of the house and see if you can find a girl to kiss.

In short, get a life, "patriot"

I get this a lot from whiney little bitches who got their asses kicked. Go cry somewhere else ya little baby! Maybe someone cares in the romper room....

 

[eots]

One thing that is always for certain when dealing with these truth debunkers, there is sure to be a lot of cheap trash talk and name calling to account for the lack of substance to their arguments. When people get defensive it is proof positive that you have hit a nerve.

Wrong again, fucktard. Sure there is a lot of trash talk, but I've also shown you've lied time and time again and you've failed miserably at responding to your failures. So there is indeed substance to my posts, much to your dismay.

Thermite was found by chemical engineer Mark Basile at WTC.

Thermite is aluminum and rust. You can find that just about anywhere, jackass! Now, if you're talking about the Jones' report, they didn't even claim to have found thermite, but some unknown "thermitic material".


Wrong again, fucktard.

Why wasn't he allowed to testify? Because he supposedly found the "thermite" in 2010, years after the commission was closed.


This coming from a fucktard who has no credentials and ignores the true professionals that understand the dynamics involved.

Here's a hint, ya piece of shit sock puppet.... if fires can't take down skyscrapers, why do they bother with fire retardant on any and all exposed steel?


But it does take a retard of epic proportions to believe fires can't cause a collapse and pretend they know more than the experts, doesn't it.


Wrong again, fucktard. You got your quotes messed up. See, the rest of your truthtard butt buddies know there have been plenty of steel buildings that collapsed from fire, so they use the term skyscraper to make the claim semi-correct. You really should talk to your superiors over in the truthtard bowel movement before making such a jackass out of yourself.


Wrong yet again, fucktard. The Windsor tower in Madrid Spain. Fire collapsed the part of the structure that was steel framed, yet the concrete framed section survived. Another one of your blatant lies exposed and another lie you will run away from without acknowledging.

Neither the towers nor WTC 7 were made with reinforced concrete for structural support, but used concrete in the flooring. Have you even bothered to look at the facts before making a jackass out of yourself, or are you just trying to remember what the other truthtards claimed while trying to look intelligent and failing?


So show us evidence of molten steel. Go ahead. A metalurgists examination results would be good. People seeing a molten substance and pretending it is steel doesn't cut it. No big solid chunks of steel that were formerly melted into pools were ever found. Not only that, but molten steel is not a byproduct of either high explosives used in controlled demolitions or in thermite.


Wrong again, fucktard. It might be more believable to an ignorant **** like you, but every structural engineer in the world would have been demanding an explanation. Just because you are ignorant about structural engineering doesn't mean the world has to behave as you THINK it should.


Wrong again, fucktard. Only the truly ignorant such as yourself believes all the resistance has to be removed for a building to fall straight down. Thanks for proving your ignorance, but that is all you've proven. In order for a building to fall to the side, it has to be destroyed at the base and the center of the tower has to go outside the footprint of the building. The bigger the building, the more impossible this becomes before the structures that are normally just shaing the load keeping the building standing are suddenly demanded to carry the entire load of the building, and thus fail.


Truthtards change their story all the time. First you stupid ***** claimed it was high explosives in WTC 7. When confronted with audio evidence truthtard claims were wrong, they changed it to thermite. When confronted with evidence THIS was wrong, truthtards pretended it was a whole bunch of very small charges, or that the buildings muffled the blasts. And, as has been explained to your sorry ignorant ass before, having an agency that alters the work in progress to continue to fit the facts as they become known is far more credible than one that has a theory and ignores everything else that comes up in the meantime.


Wrong again, fucktard. While the NIST is a credible source as proven by the fact you truthtards have yet to come up with anything even coming close to debunking it, it is far from the only source I use. But then again, you have to come up with SOMETHING to try and pretend you are somehow better, right? Guess what, you piece of shit liar.... nobody is buying it.


If there is evidence to back up the claim, I'll look at it. You stupid ***** are always prancing around trying to pretend you have all kinds of evidence, but when asked to present it, you scatter like cockroaches when the lights are turned on.


No, that would be you stupid *****.


Yet you can't even get that right, can you.


It really isn't complicated.... unless you're a truthtard who pretends to know physics and is really just a jackass.


If that were the case, you would be sucking up to the NIST like you do Alex Jones. Instead, the only ones bashing the NIST are the truthtards. The other experts around the world who set code based on findings from the NIST didn't find anything major wrong with the NIST report. So who are we to believe? Truthtard pieces of shit like you who constantly lie? Or the NIST which has no reason to lie?


Yet other structural agencies have not backed up your bullshit. Why is that? Oh right. They're not braindead like you.

9/11 goes all the way to the top. Do you really think these guys are going to indict the president and all the other higher ups in their findings?

The NIST doesn't indict anyone, numbnuts! They simply report what happened to cause the collapse. You're so ******* ignorant you don't even know who does what!

Of course not. They enjoy being alive.

Uh huh. Have you noticed the President who was in power on 9/11 is no longer in power, and has no ability to "silence" anyone. And then, of course, there is the logical falacy of you ignorant *****. If you actually believed that anyone who speaks out about the government being behind 9/11 is at risk of losing their lives, we wouldn't hear peep one out of you pussies.

Thanks for the laughs, fucktard!

the moron post a picture of a standing building that burned like a roman candle for days and claims its collapsed..lol

 

[eots]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65Qg_-89Zr8]YouTube - ‪Bad Ass Skyscraper Fires and Destruction!! Awesome!!‬‏[/ame]